Problems with "cure" idea from the scientists' POV

Post Reply New Topic

As the O.P., I request that this thread go back to its original topic, which is NOT vaccines or laws pertaining to same. Please debate about vaccination laws in a separate thread, perhaps in PPR.

Everyone, please limit this thread to discussion about the article I posted, and about the relative feasibility and desirability of trying to "cure" autism vs. focusing scientific research more on other things.

I wouldn't be very surprised if scientists already discovered or progressed with something really new yet not very relevant to autism.
Stuff across varying domains of human studies, in pursuit of finding the causes and the intent of curing autism.


That kind of complex.

Where the intent DID literally went nowhere to a point of getting discoveries little to do with it, yet quite a revelation elsewhere.


It won't be a shocker if trying to understand where and how autism happens takes an entirety of anthopology and more.

The point of the article is that there are reasons, other than "ND political correctness," why seeking a "cure" for most kinds of autism is not likely to be a fruitful endeavor, and why there are better ways to help autistic people.


They tried hard to find a cure, and they are now coming to terms with their failure. That's the main point here.

It now appears that only a few of the many kinds of autism lend themselves to a cure in the foreseeable future. Those few are specific genetic syndromes affecting single genes or regions of DNA. Luckily those few kinds of autism are also among the most severely disabling kinds.


Early intervention is not a cure. It is an attempt to minimize the child's disability. How well it works in the long run remains to be seen, as these kids grow up.

Autistic rights activists are concerned about possible longterm side-effects, some of which may be hard to prove. For example, when these kids grow up, will they end up being even more prone to depression, anxiety, etc. than they would otherwise be? Will they be truly more comfortable in their social interactions, or will they just be better at masking (which is exhausting)?

A concern of mine is that early intervention might have the unwanted side-effect of suppressing at least some of whatever talents the child might otherwise have, or perhaps give the child a specific learning disability that they might not otherwise have. In particular, I wonder how many cases of "dyscalculia" might have been induced by ABA in early childhood.


SBC takes what seems to me to be, for the most part, a sensible middle-ground position. See his Scientific American article The Concept of Neurodiversity Is Dividing the Autism Community, April 30, 2019. My only criticism of SBC's current view is that I think he should be a little more cautious about endorsing early intervention, since we don't yet know the longterm side-effects.


Really? To me it seems very unlikely that the COVID-19 crisis will lead to any fundamental breakthroughs in genetics research. Such fundamental breakthroughs are not necessary to develop vaccines and tests for COVID.


By "prevention" do you mean eugenics? You do realize that neurodiversity advocates are not the only people who have ethical objections to eugenics?

Autism is neurological in nature, and it affects all aspects of the person (body and mind). It is intrinsic in every cell of the body---especially if it is of genetic origin.

It doesn't mean I believe autism is a "defect." It's more like I believe it is a condition which has certain symptoms, some of which could "limit" a person; and some of which could enhance a person.

There is no way it can be "cured," in my opinion, after a person is born. It might be able to be "prevented" through some sort of "gene therapy" in utero. Or through a more optimal perinatal environment----if there are perinatal causes.

I wish it was like syphilis-----where one can merely get injected with a few million units of Penicillin---and, voila, you're cured!

Additionally, there are many causes for autism----each of them just might demand a different "curative method."

Very much like the common cold, autism can be treated quite well, to the point where one does not seem "autistic" at all, or seem to have a cold at all.

But you can't cure either.

That's currently the goal for those kinds of autism that are caused by specific genetic syndromes involving single mutations.

IMO such a radical approach is justified only for the most severely disabling kinds of autism. Fortunately, most "syndromic" autism falls into that category.

I agree. There are times when an "autistic perspective" could very well be useful. It would be unethical to "cure" a person with that perspective---it would sort of be like a lobotomy.

Your simply making assumptions by claiming something is incurable in the future, one could say the same for just about any brain medical disorder like Parkinson’s, ALS, etc.

Or disorders that were incurable in the past but are treatable today. I believe your in your 60`s so you must remember the AIDS / HIV condition in the 80`s. If you had that it was a certain death sentence then, now very treatable today.

I read someone recently a researcher removed someone`s HIV status altogether via a novel genetic treatment about a year ago.

There`s lots of scope to potentially biologically treat autism in the future, especially the auto immune side of things which features big in the condition.

Although in the future the biggest potential will be genetic therapy, maybe influencing neuro receptors or GABA & serotonin for example that has another big impact on autism.

Everything in life boils down to supply & demand, if people want something, they will be people trying to serve that in some way. Autism is no different so they will be scientists who will try

The supply is obvious and the demand is from some autistics who want better biological treatments and NT society who want to rescue severely autistic kids from a very grim prognosis like a shortened life expectancy & a lifetime of costly care requirements.

The demand is there even from some high functioning Aspies.

Its as simple as that, Nothing ND can ever say or do will change the obvious fact that probably more than 99% of the population would agree with, that the person in the video with severe autism would benefit from a “cure” or a “biological treatment”. There is nothing ND accommodations can offer that replaces that simple common view.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4PTf7LgsIE



I agree which was my concern with the COVID-19 vaccines. Everything has to be properly tested for a period of time measured in years.



The vaccines m RNA is genetic in origin. There will be demand for more genetic research since COVID.
Genetics & genetic viruses is a national security issue now, like 9/11 was to the security / military Ind Complex.

There will be huge money going in to better sequencing machines and genetic research in general. Some of that will trickle down to other researchers in the form of better understanding of genetic science & better machines and processes



There’s positive & negative eugenics. Heart surgery in the womb v Hitlers master race theory, most people can use their common sense & can see there`s a difference

Pure Eugenics is all about matchmaking ideal adults, not treating and curing disorders, since a pure eugenicist is trying to create a child without disorders through adult sex of perfect adults, not trying to get into a situation where they have to deal with one. Like the villain Hugo Drax in the bond movie Moonraker, who wants to kill all humans from space & replace them with his chosen disciples.

eugenicists are not interesting in curing or treating

Some form of eugenic prevention will probably happen naturally whether anyone likes it or not. In the near future everyone will know their whole genome and inevitably you`ll have genetic matchmaking. Young couples will simply upload their info into an app & it will give the likelihood of genetic problems with children. It will be as routine to some as checking comparing star sign matches today. Although it may not eliminate de novo mutations that lead to autism, but there may be other ways to deal with that.

A young person who wants kids in the future may decide not to form a serious relationship with someone if their child has a high likelyhood of disability

Not saying I agree or that’s good & not without problems, since it creates a genetic underclass, but still, it will happen anyway.

Treatments and prevention are coming and ND will just have to make peace with that & the fact that autism is a disability for many.

Treatments, of course.

Cures, no way.

You speak of "the" condition, as if autism is just one condition. That's the heart of the problem. It's not just one condition. It's at least hundreds, maybe thousands, of different conditions, that all happen to have some commonalities.

So it's highly unlikely that all or most kinds of autism could be completely "cured" during the next 50 years, or even the next 100 years. Because each of these conditions affects only a small fraction of the total number of autistic people, trying to "cure" all of them -- if feasible at all within the next 50 to 100 years -- would cost a huge amount of research money that could be better spent on conditions that affect more people.

If there is going to be autism "cure" (as distinct from just "treatment") research, it should prioritize the most severely disabling kinds of autism.


Serotonin levels are abnormal in some -- but my no means all -- autistic people.

Serotonin levels also have a role in depression. There already exist medications affecting serotonin levels: SSRI's, such as Prozac, which are used as anti-depressants. Back in 2003 or so, there were studies of the possible use of Prozac to treat autism spectrum disorders. Didn't work as a treatment of ASD per se.

There have been contradictory results regarding GABA -- see Study calls into question chemical messenger’s role in autism by Nicholette Zeliadt, Spectrum News, 29 October 2018.

Contradictory results are the bane of small-sample autism studies of all kinds, because autism isn't just one thing.


Genome sequencing can already be done relatively cheaply.

The big hurdle in vaccine development isn't the genetics. It's the clinical trials.

That's the mistake many researchers make----deeming autism just "one condition."

The following video discusses the current (as of a little over two years ago) state of autism genetics research in detail:



Wendy Chung and Autism: Could Genetics Hold the Answers? - Mind Science Foundation, Dec 26, 2018.

Thanks for the link, I was half expecting a rather gloomy talk about difficulties but it was quite positive.

Your analysis with respect is overly rigid.

To begin with there is no biological diagnosis with autism it’s solely on behavior traits.

Autism is just a 1940’s name or parking space for something science didn’t understand, but one day they will

There certainly may be many autism’s but maybe not that many in the end.

If it’s an accumulation of genes they can chip away at some of ones that have the greatest effect making a huge difference.

Science progress is like a game of Tetris things can stay static for a long time awaiting another piece of technology in another area usually chip design, interest or funds then things can surge forward.

Home computers, mobiles and VR were all like this for a while. The same for rocket design. NASA only just built a rocket that can potentially go to the moon again after 50 years!

Nobody in science is giving up nor unlikely to give up for as long as the demand is there.

There is and will always be strong demand:-

1. Humans are sexual animals that seek relationships, the young man who sees his peers dating, sees a girl he likes who rejects him as she’s put off by his autism- demand

2. The young person who seeks social contact sees his peers socialize on a sat night but he is stuck in with no friends with his parents- demand

3. The young person who is limited in career options because of his communication difficulties- demand

4. The autistic person who’s living in poverty because his autism prevents him getting a better job- demand

5. The autistic person that wants to contribute to conversations and debates with NTs but cannot because of their communication difficulties - demand

The aspie who self medicates to explore ways of relieving their crippling anxiety- demand

This is just hf aspie’s like myself, I not even touched upon the severe end of ASD

The gov having to pay welfare to those who cannot work because their autism is too severe they may also have severe ID - demand

The gov who have to pay out of the limited schools budget for special schools and specialist teachers because a main stream school won’t be able to cope - demand

The gov who have to pay out of the social budget for residential care for severely disabled adults because their parents are too elderly or dead. So maybe the elderly care home won’t be built because there’s money for just one - demand

Basic humanity of people seeing severely effected adults who are unable to fully contribute to society, self harm, look like they are in severe stress & half normal life expectancy- demand

The video you attached they needed 50,000 volunteers they got over 100,000 - demand
——

So you see as long as the demand is there scientists will always research treatments and a cure for autism.

Remember the world goes round on supply and demand.

And demand can happens through indoctrination and some self fulfilling prophecies of a problem.
Humans are not rational beings -- if everyone's doing it, therefore it must be right.

As much as you keep painting anyone involved with autism as a victim, and while autism is special...
It's not THAT special to be chosen over other demands.


I'm just gonna question whatever you're asserting -- cause the goals are supposedly for all.

Issue with #1; since if this is the case, why worry spreading or passing about autism if autism itself is a deterrent?

Issue with #2; social norms and standards. And yes, this includes the so-called LFA.

Issue with #3; matters of upbringing and accessibility. Also why worry when #1 is in effect?
Anyone inadequate enough cannot breed, yes? It's naive to assume that it takes romance and relationships to reproduce.

Issue with #4; this is also a matter of circumstances and upbringing. You don't know how poverty works, do you?
And in certain places, it doesn't matter how competent you are, let alone autistic -- as long as it's all the person knows, as long as the person's world is just a day by day to survive -- there are little room to expand.

Issue with #5; why?
The communication is complex and not merely about 'contributing' or 'debating'; ranging from confidence to language related thinking abilities to social navigation to outright physical manipulation of one's body.

Issue with #6; common to societies that are very fast paced and/or too chaotic or are crappier with relations and emotions.
We've been already living in a world where even NTs are already tested to their limits.
And no, not everyone has the privilege to even work in minimum wage and works 40 hours a day.

Issue with #7; (skip the personal aspie bit) not all goverments can take care of it's people, period.
I will say it; the world is not like the west where people expects welfare from the government along with other ideas.

Issue with #8; related to #6-#7...
You had no idea what it was like not to even have a concept of a special school can exists -- like at all, do you?
From where I came from, it's not a secret and it is explicitly stated that the government is never going to fund anything related special education -- it's just not worth the investment.
And the complaint and reason for demand was that it (the government) can? I do not understand this logic sometimes.

Issue with #9; that's likely your cultures' problem.
I won't be surprised that, somewhere out there, right now, is still wrecking it's own economy in favor of importing health care staffs.

Issue with #10; scientists are very much likely about to investigate this matter because the current idea of cure may not possible.

So why not the alternative? Or heck, behind the demand for curing autism;

Cure against intellectual disability.
Treatment for aggressions and causes of meltdowns.
Possibly other matters to do with learning disabilities and developmental issues.
Solutions for every forms of communication issues that seem to persists.
Long term to permanent solutions for executive dysfunction most of all but this is as complex as communication issues.

Enough to remove the autism diagnosis, and replace with something else -- the less severe, the less numbers and intensity of symptoms.
It'll also weed out subgroups, little by little...

After all, autism is behavioral based.

It's not like all cases of autism have fragile X syndome or something like that -- it's considered a type of autism that can truly benefit from genetics research -- heck, I've already seen that specific type of genetic alteration can be screened.
I've yet to see how that alteration be undone. I could guessed it already had.

But as others already stated: autism is not one.

There may be types that are pervasive and no amount of reducing it's issues making it less autistic -- just more functioning.

Hi Mona asked a direct question and I answered it as asked from a personal, futurist and science perspective

I’m not saying YOU or EVERYONE should be cured or undergo future treatment if they don’t want to.

I’m for personal choice. If someone doesn’t want to be treated leave them alone.

But many Autistic people do seek treatment or desire a cure and some of the examples I gave are problems many people like me have gone through growing up.

Sure there are always accommodations needed but some people just would rather fast track and not have the problem in the first place which is entirely logical from their perspective.

Like I said simple problem = demand = research solutions incentive

No one is researching how humans can grow a third arm because the demand is not there. But there is a demand for biological treatments for brain disabilities and cure for autism with some of the examples given.

Like I say I’m for personal choice unlike some extremists in the ND movement that wants to tell everyone what to think, take control of people’s future choices and create a kind of vertical power structure of them at the top with their lower functioning clients at the bottom looking up to them for their next orders.

I never implied that you did...


But as much as the ND movement wanted equal rights and as much as those who want cure demands it -- it lies on the back of a very long queue.
There are more demands to vaccinate COVID, cure and prevent cancer, and amongst many things in the medical field.

So scientists may try to cut this line via going through an alternative and more immediate route -- a route that may even benefit allistics demanding their own woes, as the matters of mental health are still relatively new.

It's not the end of research as some thought it is.



Sometimes it's a bit sad for wanting the cure too much; there are stories of scammers exploiting the feelings parents and sufferers alike.
And are willing to pay the price, simply because they could.

Perhaps the declaration in the article that the cure does not exists is one way to tell anyone too desperate enough to not fall too far.

Yes you are right about Scams which is sad or dangerous.

Really speaking in hypothetical terms rather than what is available now.

Wanting treatments/ cure does not replace equal rights for autism any more than any other disabilities.

You comment about researching cures for cancer/ covid is well meaning but slightly unrealistic of the different branches of science.

There are many specialist areas in medicine/ science many cross over each other.

Just as you have eye specialists, you have neurologists. It’s the same with research.

These people are motivated to go into their chosen area. There’s always going to be a lot of motivation around brain research as it’s still a big mystery on how the brain works.

So treatments for autism may come also completely by accident as well while researching other brain conditions like bi polar, schizophrenia for example.

Sadly particularly in the US big Pharma has its element of corruption and is not completely trustworthy. So maybe the next big thing will come elsewhere China perhaps?